Abstract
Abstract The ‘climate crisis’ describes human-caused global warming and climate change and its consequences. It conveys the sense of urgency surrounding humanity's failure to take sufficient action to slow down, stop and reverse global warming. The leading direct cause of the climate crisis is carbon dioxide (CO2) released as a by-product of burning fossil fuels,i which supply ~87% of the world's energy. The second most important cause of the climate crisis is deforestation to create more land for crops and livestock. The solutions have been stated as simply ‘leave the fossil carbon in the ground’ and ‘end deforestation’. Rather than address fossil fuel supplies, climate policies focus almost exclusively on the demand side, blaming fossil fuel users for greenhouse gas emissions. The fundamental reason that we are not solving the climate crisis is not a lack of green energy solutions. It is that governments continue with energy strategies that prioritize fossil fuels. These entrenched energy policies subsidize the discovery, extraction, transport and sale of fossil fuels, with the aim of ensuring a cheap, plentiful, steady supply of fossil energy into the future. This paper compares the climate crisis to two other environmental crises: ozone depletion and the COVID-19 pandemic. Halting and reversing damage to the ozone layer is one of humanity's greatest environmental success stories. The world's response to COVID-19 demonstrates that it is possible for governments to take decisive action to avert an imminent crisis. The approach to solving both of these crises was the same: (1) identify the precise cause of the problem through expert scientific advice; (2) with support by the public, pass legislation focused on the cause of the problem; and (3) employ a robust feedback mechanism to assess progress and adjust the approach. This is not yet being done to solve the climate crisis, but working within the 2015 Paris Climate Agreement framework, it could be. Every nation can contribute to solving the climate crisis by: (1) changing their energy strategy to green energy sources instead of fossil fuels; and (2) critically reviewing every law, policy and trade agreement (including transport, food production, food sources and land use) that affects the climate crisis.
Highlights
Humanity is not on track to solve the climate crisis
The good news is that today we have many technological solutions for green energy and efficiency (e.g., García-Olivares et al, 2018; Hawken, 2017), making green energy sources such as solar and wind power less expensive than fossil fuels
It is a first step towards solving the climate crisis, as it raises public awareness because each signatory country has to pledge its Intended Nationally Determined Contribution (INDC) to reduce net greenhouse gas emissions
Summary
Humanity is not on track to solve the climate crisis. If unchecked, climate change could lead to global mean temperature increases of several degrees, large uninhabitable regions, melting icecaps and flooding of coastal cities. The good news is that today we have many technological solutions for green energy and efficiency (e.g., García-Olivares et al, 2018; Hawken, 2017), making green energy sources such as solar and wind power less expensive than fossil fuels Implementing this transition to a low-carbon global economy could be a net financial benefit. The total cost of direct and indirect subsidies by governments to the fossil fuel industry has been estimated to be 6.5% of global GDP (Coady et al, 2019) This is more than 2.5 times as large as the total worldwide investment in all types of research and development (Congressional Research Service, 2019). The biggest impediment to switching to renewables is government energy policies that support the fossil fuel industry
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have